Massey v. State
309 Ga. App. 501
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Massey was convicted by a jury of DUI, reckless driving, fleeing and eluding, speeding, three no-passing zone violations, and two traffic-control device disobediences in connection with a June 30, 2008 incident in Hall County, Georgia.
- The State introduced similar transaction evidence describing a May 31, 2004 DUI-related crash where Massey was intoxicated and pled guilty.
- At trial, Massey argued the similar transaction evidence was overly prejudicial and not relevant to identity since the defense focused on who was driving.
- The trial court admitted the similar transaction evidence for the limited purpose of showing bent of mind and course of conduct.
- The defense emphasized Massey’s claim that he was not driving the Pontiac; the State contends it needed to prove Massey drove under the influence.
- The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the evidence was admissible for bent of mind and course of conduct and affirmed the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether similar transaction evidence was admissible | Massey; similar acts prejudicial, not probative of identity | State; evidence shows bent of mind and conduct | Admissible for bent of mind and conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Cunningham v. State, 255 Ga. 35 (1985) (admissibility for bent of mind and course of conduct in DUI context)
- Steele v. State, 306 Ga.App. 870 (2010) (admissibility for similar transaction evidence in DUI case)
- Caraway v. State, 286 Ga.App. 592 (2007) (evidence of prior DUI relevant to bent of mind and driving under influence)
- Ayiteyfio v. State, 308 Ga.App. 286 (2011) (prior DUI offense relevant to bent of mind and conduct)